Running 20 year old binaries is not the primary use case and it is very manageable if you actually want to do that. I’ve been amazed at some completely ancient programs that I’ve been able to run, but I don’t see any reason a 20 year old binary should “just work”, that kind of support is a bit silly. Instead maybe we should encourage abandonware to not be abandonware? If you’re not going to support your project, and that project is important to people, provide the source. I don’t blame the Linux developers for that kind of thing at all.
I see your point. What I think though is that it’s particularly hard on Linux to fix programs, especially if you are not a developer (which is always the perspective I try to see things from). Most notable architectural difference here between f.e. Windows and Linux would be how you’re able to simply throw a library into the same folder as the executable on Windows for it to use it (an action every common user can do and fully understand). On Linux you hypothetically can work with LD_PRELOAD, but (assuming someone already wrote a tutorial and points to the file for you to grab) even that already requires more knowledge about some system concepts.
Of course software not becoming abandonware would be best, but that’s not really something we can expect to happen. Even if Europe would make the absolutely banger move and enforce open-sourcing upon abandonment of software after a few years, it would still require a developer to fix issues. The architecture of the OS should be set up so it’s as easy as possible to make something run, using concepts (like file management) as many people as possible are familiar with.
devs are often being discouraged from compiling tools in a way that makes them work forever (since that makes the app bigger and potentially consume more memory) This is simply not true.
We might be in different bubbles in this case. Please be aware I’m talking about the very loud toxic minority (hopefully it’s a minority…) who constantly shit about how things aren’t following “KISS” close enough, that your app or distro is bloated, etc. It feels like if I was collecting all statements against Flatpak, systemd, even just static linking that boil down to “it’s bloated! It’s not KISS! Bad!” (so not well-reasoned criticism) I read or hear, including around my local hackspace or on events, I could fill whole books.
Linux desktop isn’t actively working against disabled people, don’t be obtuse.
Not actively, no. The issue here is rather that, for way too long, we didn’t care enough. We had things working comparatively nicely one or two decades ago, but in more recent history the support deteriorated to such a degree the Linux desktop has become, to a huge degree, inaccessible to blind people (mostly due to issues with Wayland). I didn’t save those blogposts or statements to show in discussions like these, but the takeaway from all of them is that “It used to work for me many years ago, but if I want a system that respects me today I’m forced to use Mac”. But of course you’re also right, it’s slowly getting better! (Correct me if I’m wrong, not a native speaker: “being alienated” doesn’t inherently imply malicious intent of doing so, does it?)
But this idea that “finally we have people that want Linux to work” is infuriating. Do you have any idea how much of an uphill battle it has been to just get WiFi working on Linux? That isn’t because the volunteer community is lazy and doesn’t want things to work: that’s because literally every company is hostile to the open source community to the point of sometimes deliberately changing things just to screw us over. The entitlement in that statement is truly infuriating.
Sorry, I was really pissed off yesterday evening by earlier comments in the chain implying it’s good to “filter out people” and got carried away. This one is completely on me.
I think it’s slowly getting better though, more people are finally listening. At least that’s what I notice; still, those purists who don’t give a proper shit (“The CLI is perfectly accessible! It’s all text, where’s the problem?”) and believe everyone got to be a developer or filtered out are really loud and annoying.
Of course the system should inherently be accessible. Better backwards compatibility would just make a lot of things simpler, even if what’s being made simpler is to deal with bad decisions and exclusion. Enabling people (everyone, not just abled or developers) is always good.